The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
11 Points

Texting while driving is just as dangerous as drinking or smoking while driving

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 952 times Debate No: 76418
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)




While many people's thoughts on texting while driving or "distracted" driving is that it's just as dangerous as drinking or smoking then driving they are wrong.


Big thanks to Con for creating this debate. Let's go ahead and lay down some burdens, just to make sure we are clear on what this debate is about. In order for Pro to win, I must prove that texting while driving is equally or more dangerous than driving under the influence. In order for Con to win, he must prove my lines of argumentation to be false and must conversely prove that texting while driving is not as dangerous as drinking or smoking while operating a car.

Also, Con offered no scope on the resolution, as to what area of the globe we are discussing, which is important in my point 1. Because no scope has been offered, I'll go ahead and assume we are talking about the whole globe. Con is welcome to contest this if he believes a different scope is necessary,

Now, that thats cleared up, lets take a look at several main points.

1. Smoking is either not a hazard, or an insignificant problem.
I'm a little confused as to why smoking made its way into this debate, as tobacco has no effect on an individual's awareness or consciousness, and is done while driving across the globe. Con didn't clarify what exactly he means by smoking, so for the purposes of an intelligent debate, I will assume he is talking about marijuana: a substance that actually DOES have an effect on awareness. However, that argument has little weight since only 4 out of the 50 states in the US allow recreational marijuana. Likewise, less than 10 countries out of the 200+ countries on this planet legalized the substance for non-medical use.

Sources for point 1 :

2. No Con support given.
Because Con did not state that round 1 was acceptance, I am forced to assume that the sentence description he gave above is his entire argument. The problem lies in the fact that he lacks a warrant, or any reason why we should believe his assertion. Socrates once famously stated, "He who asserts must prove." Thus, Con must prove it to be true with a warrant(s)...he can't just rephrase the resolution.

3. Texting is very dangerous, but for different reasons.
Quite recently, a study was performed by the Transport Research Laboratory where they recruited, "17 young drivers between the ages of 17 and 24 and had them perform driving simulation tests to see how their driving would be affected by reading and writing text messages without putting them in real danger. The results show those who occupied themselves with text messages, either by reading or writing them, had slower reactions times by 35%. By comparison, drunk drivers displayed a 12% decrease in reaction time, while drivers intoxicated with cannabis had slowed response times by 21%."


Additionally, texting forces both of the driver's eyes be off of the road, meaning they can drift into another lane or perhaps into ongoing traffic. Often if they are texting they can suddenly hit a median because their car was slightly drifting in one direction. The same exact consequences occur with driving under the influence: you lose complete awareness and often start drifting from lane to lane.

In a study done by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, texting increases the chances of crashing by around 23%, because it takes the driver's eyes off the road for an average of 4.6s"each time. summarizes this point: "To put that into perspective, if a vehicle is traveling at 55mph, the average driver doesn"t look at the road for about the length of an entire football field while sending a text."


Finally, there's one more study I'd like to promote, and that is a study done by the Car and Driver magazine. The people at the magazine tested (in the car) the response times of someone who was legally drunk, someone who was reading an email, and someone who was texting in the car. Here were the results: (copied from CNBC website for upmost accuracy)

Unimpaired: .54 seconds to brake
Legally drunk: add 4 feet
Reading e-mail: add 36 feet
Sending a text: add 70 feet


In the end, the debate boils down to the facts. The studies performed and listed above clearly indicate that texting is every bit of a threat, if not more, than drunk driving (includes driving under the influence of marijuana.) Because Con brought up no studies of his own, nor any reason at all to believe him, I would urge you to vote Pro.

Debate Round No. 1


yeah idk what i was going for here


Since Con made no arguments in his Round 2 speech, I would ask that you vote for Con, on these premises:

1. Tobacco smoking is not harmful, and marijuana smoking only exists on a small part of the globe.

2. The studies show that texting while driving is more deadly and more prone to cause an accident than driving under the influence of alcohol.

Thanks for your time, and please vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Rew 2 years ago
As framed "just as" is "equal to". Con could have taken that because texting is shown to not be "just as" dangerous it is WAY more dangerous. By moving the argument to texting being more dangerous pro is able to win. Good job pro!
Posted by hldemi 2 years ago
Its important to note how drunk the driver is, how high driver is and how fast or in what time intervals driver texts. Im sure that sending SMS to your wife : honey Im coming home while driving is less harmfull then having 0.2% alcohol in the blood. Also note that you text for short time and you plan your texting on some safer part of the road while you are drunk all the time you drive and you dont give a fck about anything... Anyway Con could make a much better case. He didnt even try.
Posted by Rami 2 years ago
Pi would like to debate this, as I already debated someone on this topic and they forfeited.
Posted by Rew 2 years ago
Can I argue it is "more" dangerous? If so, I'll take pro. Cheers.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Isaiah68 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Content.
Vote Placed by Benshapiro 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con dropped his entire case in his last round. This is poor conduct and the resolution wasn't upheld so conduct and arguments to pro.